More than half a century is more than enough
Our country’s half-hearted approach to measuring and counting poverty, never mind addressing it with the respect our neighbors deserve, has run its course. We have accepted “official” U.S. poverty counts that should be thought of as statistical measures rather than valid indicators of economic well-being.
These counts are based on a poverty line that was developed more than 60 years ago. It does not reflect changes in current spending patterns nor does it account for geographic differences in costs of living. For example, housing costs take up a larger portion of family budgets than they did 50 years ago and housing costs are significantly higher in some areas of the country than others, as illustrated to the right.
As a result, using the federal poverty line underestimates the number of people in this country who do not have enough to get by on their own.
Does your family of three need more than $25,820/year to get by?
Here’s a better way to understand the needs
Many groups have developed their own “poverty lines” and formulas for determining what individuals need to get by. Each requires assumptions about costs of living and what “minimum needs” are. For example, how do we define adequate shelter, food, and health care? How can we quantify educational resources? What are "basic needs"? Furthermore, if we want to count the number of people in poverty on a regular basis, we need readily available and reliable data that can measure minimum needs.
Rather than entering the debate about how to best quantify and measure minimum needs, The Shared Humanity Project has operationalized our definition of poverty in a simple manner. Borrowing from many comparative poverty researchers and some European agencies, we define poverty as having less than 50% of median household income relative to the area in which you live. A locally-based relative standard captures local living standards to better reflect the resources required to live within a community.
Of note is that until 2007, the Gallup poll asked individuals how much a family of four would need to “get along in your local community.” Median responses to the question were nearly always equal to 50% of median income, suggesting that a relative poverty threshold set at 50% of median income better represents the amount of income required to meet basic needs.
Interestingly, when the US poverty threshold was first introduced in the 1960s, it was equal to nearly 50% of national median income, but has trended downward ever since. One could say our efforts to address it have, as well. To learn more about how we measure and count the number of our fellow Americans living in economic need, check out our data methodology paper.
Inadequate and harmful…
… may be the most accurate way to describe our country’s official poverty standards.
They do not account for current consumption patterns
They do not account for cost of living differences
They provide insufficient and sometimes harmful eligibility guidelines for assistance